獨坐幽篁裏,彈琴復長嘯。深林人不知,明月來相照。 王維《竹里館》 Sitting alone, in the hush of the bamboo; I thrum my lute, and whistle lingering notes. In the secrecy of the wood, no one can hear; Only the clear moon, comes to shine on me.” [Hut Among the Bamboos : Wang Wei (701-761A.D.]
2021年8月18日 星期三
黃藍家庭分離記
麥理浩「模範城市」的構想
這是根據近年解密的英國檔案所得出的結論。很多人以為,首先提出香港「一國兩制」的人,是鄧小平。可是,我們最多只可以說,鄧小平是首先提倡台灣實行「一國兩制」的人。1979年1月鄧小平提出「一國兩制」,只是為了統一台灣,而沒有想過為香港及澳門而設,因為當時中共仍想港澳長期維持現狀。究竟為何麥理浩會提出「一國兩制」構思呢?就是為了日後的香港前途談判,制訂英方的策略方針。

1967年左派暴動,進一步增加了英國在港統治的不安全感,令英國人不得不認真思考如何應對97問題,畢竟當時距離新界租約期滿,只有30年。到了1970年代初,隨著中英關係有所改善,一些英國外交部官員認為,中共日後同意延續新界租約,並非絕無可能。可是,即將到香港出任總督的麥理浩,在1971年10月的最高機密書信中指出,固然英國在談判時,可以向中方爭取續租新界,但他相信英方能夠爭取到的最佳方案,是香港在1997年後,成為中國主權下的「特別行政區」("a special administrative district"),以令「外國人可以在香港繼續居住」("would facilitate the continued residence of foreigners")。

至於如何令日後中國政府會同意「香港特別行政區」這個安排?麥理浩認為,必須要令香港各方面的生活質素及發展水平,遠遠優於中國("ensure that conditions in Hong Kong are so superior in every way to those in China"),從而令中國在決定將香港吸納入其境內時,有所猶疑顧忌。所以,近年的香港史研究已發現,麥理浩時代的各種社會民生重大改革,主要是為了增加英方在日後前途談判時的籌碼。麥理浩在1974年的外交部絕密書信《管治香港的目標》中就清楚說明,要盡一切方法,將香港建設為「模範城市」("a model city"),所以之後就有「十年建屋計劃」等各種前所未有的民生工程,香港從此進入黃金時代。
結果,一如麥理浩所料,北京真的不讓英國在1997年後繼續統治香港,但為了保持香港的利用價值,以及防止香港出現「人踩人」式的信心危機,就承諾日後香港實行「一國兩制」,成立「香港特別行政區」。
由此可見,香港「一國兩制」的起源,是早於1984年,以至早於前途談判之前,而是在1971年麥理浩提出「特別行政區」這個概念時開始的。
2020年6月30 日晚上11時《港區國安法》生效後,身為歷史學博士的筆者,眼見香港種種觸目驚心的巨變,第一次覺得香港變得非常陌生,但又覺得這可能是歷史的必然,於是就動起一個念頭:在有自由、有最新解密檔案可讀的地方,全心全力寫一本書,去紀錄及分析我們曾熟悉的那個香港,究竟是如何漸漸形成,又如何最終破滅的,這本書將名為《一國兩制的開場與收場1971-2020》。若大家想在官方修的「志」以外,有非官方的香港史可讀(尤其是中文),就請支持筆者的PATREON計劃,即使因種種原因未能支持,亦希望大家留意「一國兩制的開場與收場」的FACEBOOK PAGE,多謝各位!
本文根據以下著作寫成:
呂大樂:《那似曾相識的七十年代》(增訂版)
黃文放:《中國對香港恢復行使主權的決策歷程與執行》
2021年8月10日 星期二
2021年8月9日 星期一
方健儀: 寫司儀稿的基本功
轉載《晴報》,方健儀「唔講唔知」(2018年5月14日)
小妹其中一項職業是司儀,也曾擔任有關培訓導師,對司儀的用詞特別敏感。不知何解,有些用語老是在司儀稿出現,但完全沒有意義,甚至乎有反效果,或是犯下禁忌,讓我分享幾個例子。
在我黑名單之首是「唔講唔知」。例句︰「唔講唔知,原來XX公司已經有百年歷史。」此四字詞的用意是說出一些可能令人驚訝的事情,但千萬不要忘記,世事永遠無絕對,你不知不代表別人不知,反而顯得你無知。做司儀雖則不是通才,但也不能容易「露底」,把自己立於不敗之地,別讓觀眾有機會知道你的知識水平貧乏。
另一用字是「喺我身後」。例句︰「喺我身後有全世界最大的郵輪。」當年加入電視台任職記者,做某遊行集會直播時,我對着鏡頭說︰「喺我身後的遊行人士高叫口號……」立時被編輯語重心長地說︰「你仲健在,講咩『身後』咁唔吉利?」雖是迷信之說,但我認同不論記者或司儀,都要顧及觀眾的感受,建議說「喺我後面」、「喺我旁邊」或「喺呢度」,效果或許會更佳。
我出席過一個活動,曾經親耳聽過司儀向台上致辭完畢的老闆說︰「多謝陳主席,請落台就坐。」嘩!詛咒主席「落台」真的吃了豹子膽,也十分「哽耳」,主席一定不好受。有經驗的司儀,一定會說︰「請到台下就座。」或「請移玉步到台下」,更得體及更有禮貌。
還有很多老是常出現的用字,例如「事不宜遲」,其實是沒有意思,但也是一個無傷大雅的轉折詞。還有「現在進行簡單而隆重的XX儀式」,我多年來都在想,「簡單」與「隆重」是否有點矛盾?如果儀式簡單,那何來隆重?如果隆重,又如何簡單?我想不通看不透,其實乾脆說「現在進行XX儀式」,不是更爽快嗎?
寫司儀稿和寫文章一樣,剔除沙石,文稿流暢,司儀傳達信息時自然更得心應手,觀眾亦會更易吸引,一舉兩得。
2021年8月2日 星期一
China Model
"After spending years emulating Silicon
Valley, the world’s second-biggest economy is now officially charting its own
course." ~
Extracted from
Bloomberg (27 July 2021)
"The China Model: What the Country's Tech Crackdown Is Really About "
Since the late 1990s, China has emulated Silicon Valley’s approach to innovation. Aided by Western capital and a generation of Elon Musk-like entrepreneurs—many educated overseas—the country saw Chinese versions of EBay and Amazon (Alibaba), AOL and Facebook (Tencent), and Google (Baidu) rocket to success while the government took a permissive approach to their behavior and largely protected them from U.S. competitors. At first, Chinese companies replicated services that were unavailable in or not tailored to the country, but they’ve long ceased to be mere copycats of Valley rivals and now frequently outmaneuver the global competition. So-called super apps, including Tencent Holdings Ltd.’s WeChat and Alibaba’s Alipay, also created by Ma and team, handle everything from on-demand transportation to food delivery to paying utility bills—there’s nothing comparable in the U.S. These days, Apple, Facebook, and Snapchat are racing to mimic features of these and other Chinese apps, instead of the other way around.
Just as in the U.S., unfettered growth led to increasingly powerful tech companies and CEOs who, operating with surprising independence, weren’t afraid to flex their power. China’s biggest tech companies periodically forced smaller competitors to integrate with their platforms or pressured them to sell out. Ma and other titans became cultural rock stars. He even started dressing like a rock star at raucous Alibaba events, complete with a mohawk wig and leather jacket and guitar, and became vocal about societal issues.
Just as in the U.S., unfettered growth led to increasingly powerful tech companies and CEOs who, operating with surprising independence, weren’t afraid to flex their power. China’s biggest tech companies periodically forced smaller competitors to integrate with their platforms or pressured them to sell out. Ma and other titans became cultural rock stars. He even started dressing like a rock star at raucous Alibaba events, complete with a mohawk wig and leather jacket and guitar, and became vocal about societal issues.
Some see the crackdown on Alibaba and DiDi—along with actions against dozens of other tech companies—as long overdue. Andy Tian, who led Google China’s mobile strategy in the 2000s and is now CEO at Beijing social media startup Asian Innovations Group, says it will be “positive for innovation” and “competition in China will be fiercer than in the U.S.,” because smaller companies will benefit from policies that rein in the largest competitors.
Angela Zhang, director of Hong Kong University’s Centre for Chinese Law and the author of Chinese Antitrust Exceptionalism, says the intervention will reshape the tech industry in China faster than it could happen elsewhere. “The case against Alibaba took the Chinese antitrust authority only four months to complete, whereas it will take years for U.S. and EU regulators to go after tech firms such as Facebook, Google, and Amazon, who are ready to fight tooth and nail,” she says.
Lillian Li, founder of the newsletter Chinese Characteristics, deems the disruption “a rebalancing of the dynamics, redrawing the boundaries. I don’t think the Chinese government is out there to destroy tech giants.” After decades of an anything-goes ethos, she says, China wanted to remind its tech industry “what they can do and can’t do.”